In the aftermath of the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, the political debate has quickly turned to the weapon a gunman used to massacre 49 people and injure 53 more at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, on Sunday.

Some supporters of stricter gun laws argue it’s far too easy to obtain firearms like the shooter’s Sig Sauer MCX, an $1,800 semi-automatic rifle and a cousin of the highly popular AR-15. They say the same features that have made these weapons fit for the battlefield render them unfit for civilian use. In the wrong hands, their accuracy, reduced recoil, large magazine size and high rate of fire make these guns perfectly suited to inflict mass casualties in a short period of time. And it’s hard to discount that concern: In seven of the last eight high-profile mass shootings — as well as in earlier incidents in Newtown, Connecticut, and Aurora, Colorado — perpetrators were armed with assault-style rifles.

But as momentum builds for a new assault weapons ban, data shows just how small of an effect such legislation would have on the overall levels of gun violence in the U.S.

At least 84 people have been killed and 119 have been injured so far this year in 86 shooting incidents involving assault-style rifles, according to data compiled by the Gun Violence Archive, a not-for-profit corporation that tracks gun violence. Those numbers include the casualties at Pulse nightclub over the weekend.

There have been at least 267 incidents involving assault-style rifles in 2016, including reported weapons thefts, crimes in which the guns were brandished, arrests for illegal possession and other legal interventions in which they weren’t fired.

Those deaths account for about 2 percent of the 6,153 gun deaths and less than 1 percent of the 12,560 gun injuries the Gun Violence Archive has counted so far this year. This tally consists largely of homicides and assaults, but also includes suicides that were part of a murder-suicide. It also counts accidental deaths, the majority of which involve handguns, not rifles.

If those numbers seem high, that’s because they are. The U.S. has the highest gun death and ownership rates in the developed world. Americans are 10 times more likely to be killed with a gun than people in other developed nations; with an estimated 300 million to 400 million civilian firearms, the U.S. is by far the most heavily armed nation per capita. About 20 million to 30 million of those guns are assault-style rifles, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a lobbying group that wants you to refer to these weapons as “modern sporting rifles.”

Gun Violence Archive notes that its count could be incomplete because it relies on news and police reports, which don’t always include full details on the weapons used. Its data also only specifies incidents involving AR-15s and AK-47s, two of the most popular types of assault-style rifles but not the only ones available to civilians.

While these rifles hardly factor into the routine gun violence that rips through the nation every day, we found plenty of incidents that underscore the inherent danger they present.

In May, for example, a military veteran engaged in a standoff with police in Houston managed to fire off 212 shots from an AR-15 before a SWAT sniper killed him. He injured six people with the rifle, all after killing a man in an ambush with a handgun. The suspect’s family claimed he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.

Earlier this week in Detroit, armed gunmen used an AK-47 and another weapon to open fire on a vehicle, killing two and injuring one more in a hail of 30 bullets. An AK-47 was also used in a mass shooting in Pittsburgh earlier this year, when gunmen unloaded 49 rounds into a crowd of partygoers, killing five and wounding three.

Other shootings have flown further under the radar, likely because they didn’t result in casualties. Earlier this week, a man reportedly armed with an AR-type rifle fired between 40 and 50 shots at police officers in Georgia. Nobody was injured.

With so many assault-style rifles already in circulation, gun advocates believe these rare instances of misuse shouldn’t outweigh evidence suggesting that the overwhelming majority of owners are law-abiding citizens. But opponents argue that this level of firepower is unnecessary for civilians, especially considering how easy it is for them to obtain. They say these guns — which have an average price tag of $1,000 but often come much cheaper — give pretty much anyone the means to carry out a mass casualty event. Some lawmakers want to address that by renewing the sort of assault weapons ban that expired in 2004.

Which side is right? It’s a worthwhile debate. And maybe we don’t need to choose between nearly unlimited access and total prohibition. Maybe would-be buyers of assault-style rifles should have to first provide endorsements from people willing to vouch for their intentions. Maybe “modern sporting” riflemen and riflewomen should be required undergo periodic certification to make sure they’re fit to be members of the “well-regulated militia” referenced in the Second Amendment. At the very least, maybe we shouldn’t just let people buy these weapons on a whim, with no waiting period whatsoever.

This is really not the only conversation we should be having about gun violence — a scourge of murders, suicides, domestic mass shootings and tragic accidents that claimed 33,636 lives, mostly by handgun, in 2013, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But as long as we’re only willing to discuss this massive, deeply entrenched issue in response to an atypical act of unfathomable brutality, maybe this is the best we can do.

Wow if you took the time to do some research maybe you'd join the rest of us smarties lol.
You're arguing with me about the definition of assault rifle which is a RAPID FIRE rifle designed for MILITARY use, select fire, fully automatic and the like.
I'm not berating you for being military my friend, the whole male side of my family has been in the military so I'm not ignorant to the "terms" or whatever. Due to my pre existing health problems I cannot join or else I WOULD have. Never said I was hardcore btw, but being around and working with firearms for 18+ years I DO know some shit so, go try to convert some other simple minded fuck please. ;)

You would do well to listen to Neph, he's served, seen a lot of combat and paid a high price.

For you and me

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve 1

No, I lead I don't follow. So far I've lead to prision 3 times

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve 1

You wailed to the mods,fuck off Ian. I'm upset you got rid of the child molester.

You would do well to listen to Neph, he's served, seen a lot of combat and paid a high price.

For you and me

I thanked him for his service, but that's as far as I go. I don't need some jar head to tell me he's right because of 'experience' then get berated for using MY experience as a reply. Its a two way road.
I appreciate what he's done but as far as holding any truth to the topics we discussed, he has none.
You should feel ashamed for sticking up for a person who is in the wrong only because of his 'experience'.

Anywho I hope people start to realize that the problem with these shootings is due to gun fee zones being permitted. It makes no sense to me to have them, obviously people think that responsible citizens with firearms are just going to start shooting shit up because of the building they are in.
My heart goes to the families and victims.

I thanked him for his service, but that's as far as I go. I don't need some jar head to tell me he's right because of 'experience' then get berated for using MY experience as a reply. Its a two way road.
I appreciate what he's done but as far as holding any truth to the topics we discussed, he has none.
You should feel ashamed for sticking up for a person who is in the wrong only because of his 'experience'.

Anywho I hope people start to realize that the problem with these shootings is due to gun fee zones being permitted. It makes no sense to me to have them, obviously people think that responsible citizens with firearms are just going to start shooting shit up because of the building they are in.
My heart goes to the families and victims.

I thanked him for his service, but that's as far as I go. I don't need some jar head to tell me he's right because of 'experience' then get berated for using MY experience as a reply. Its a two way road.
I appreciate what he's done but as far as holding any truth to the topics we discussed, he has none.
You should feel ashamed for sticking up for a person who is in the wrong only because of his 'experience'.

Anywho I hope people start to realize that the problem with these shootings is due to gun fee zones being permitted. It makes no sense to me to have them, obviously people think that responsible citizens with firearms are just going to start shooting shit up because of the building they are in.
My heart goes to the families and victims.

You are wrong, you should admit it.

If Neph says he's seen a 9 used in combat and chooses to carry a .45, that just confirms what just about every combat vet has told me about the caliber, gear queers like you not presenting any compelling evidence to the contrary.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve 1

No, I lead I don't follow. So far I've lead to prision 3 times

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve 1

You wailed to the mods,fuck off Ian. I'm upset you got rid of the child molester.

I thanked him for his service, but that's as far as I go. I don't need some jar head to tell me he's right because of 'experience' then get berated for using MY experience as a reply. Its a two way road.
I appreciate what he's done but as far as holding any truth to the topics we discussed, he has none.
You should feel ashamed for sticking up for a person who is in the wrong only because of his 'experience'.

Anywho I hope people start to realize that the problem with these shootings is due to gun fee zones being permitted. It makes no sense to me to have them, obviously people think that responsible citizens with firearms are just going to start shooting shit up because of the building they are in.
My heart goes to the families and victims.

You seem to have missed the post above. I posted the truth and proved you wrong.

By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.

Now kindly go back to your fucking whole, you retarded piece of shit. You were wrong, you were always wrong, and you know nothing about weapons. Nothing. So now, would you please, kindly go fucking die in a fire.

Definition depends on jurisdiction but the one that counts is the FEDS

Quote

The term assault weapon is also commonly used to refer to some military weapons and weapon systems. The similar but technical term assault rifle refers to military rifles capable of selective fire - automatic (full-auto), semi-automatic, and burst fire. Automatic firearms (like machine guns) and assault rifles in automatic mode, shoot multiple rounds with a single trigger pull. Such firearms are Title II weapons regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. Neither the ban nor its expiration changed the legal status of automatic firearms.

While the term “assault weapons” has long been used globally to describe a broad variety of military and non-military weapons, those weapons were not defined by specific characteristics in America’s legal system until Congress approved the AWB.

Most nations do not use the term “assault weapon” to classify civilian weaponry. In the United States, the term was rarely used before gun control political efforts emerged in the 1980s. In 1989, California became the first U.S. state to identify and outlaw assault weapons.

Also in 1989, the U.S. prohibited several types of semi-automatic rifles from being imported. Those rifles were among the weapons that would eventually be banned by the AWB in 1994. Many of them were a version of the Russian military’s AK-47. Several thousand of those semi-automatic rifles, which were manufactured in China, had been purchased by American gun owners.

The term “assault weapon” was a spin-off of the U.S. military’s definition of assault rifles. The U.S. Department of Defense has long defined assault rifles as fully automatic rifles used for military purposes.

Fully-automatic weapons have been prohibited in the U.S. since the National Firearms Act of 1934. Fully-automatic firearms can spray fire with a single pull of the trigger, while semi-automatic guns fire one shot with each pull of the trigger.

While civilian ownership of automatic weapons has been heavily regulated in the U.S. since 1934, most semi-automatic weapons remained legal until 1994.

The AWB defined a broad category of semi-automatic rifles, handguns and shotguns with military-style characteristics as being “assault weapons.” The law made it illegal to make those weapons in the U.S.

for a 10-year period. In 2004, the AWB expired when Congress did not vote to renew it. As a result, it became legal to produce and own those firearms once again.

In general, the AWB defined any firearm with a detachable magazine and at least two of certain other characteristics as an assault weapon.

Telescoping stock
Pistol grip
A capacity to hold more than five rounds
For handguns:

Threaded barrels made to attach a barrel extender, handgrip or flash suppressor
A barrel shroud that can be used as a handhold
Weight of at least 50 oz. when unloaded
Nineteen models of firearms were specifically named in the legislation as assault weapons, while other models were included under the umbrella of the law’s definition of assault weapons.

A Weapon No More Dangerous…

Opponents of the AWB claimed that assault weapons are generally no more dangerous than many other readily available firearms.

Most of the defining characteristics included in the AWB do not hinder or enhance the weapons’ effectiveness or accuracy. While semi-automatic weapons can be fired faster than other firearms, a large number of semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns remained legal in the U.S. after the adoption of the AWB.

The AR-15, one of the rifles that became an assault weapon with the passage of the AWB because of its physical characteristics, is a .223 caliber. The .223 is smaller and less lethal than many rifle calibers. In most states, a .223 is not permitted for hunting big game because of the caliber’s ineffectiveness at bringing down animals such as deer and elk.

Assault Weapons Defined By States

Prior to the passage of the AWB in 1994, three U.S. states — California, Connecticut and New Jersey — had passed their own ban on certain firearms defined as assault weapons. New York and Massachusetts have since added assault weapon bans.

In each state, assault weapon definitions loosely follow the defining characteristics included in the 1994 federal legislation. In Connecticut, the law applies only to firearms specifically named as assault weapons, while in each of the other states the law applies to any firearm meeting the definitions set forth by statute.

The Following User Says Thank You to wmbondurant For This Useful Post: